A/HRC/32/36/Add.1 43. The police have justified the dispersal of protests and recourse to force by the presence of disruptive individuals — including possible agents provocateurs — in the margins of such protests. However, the Special Rapporteur is not persuaded by this argument. In his view, it is the duty of the police to distinguish between peaceful demonstrators and disruptive individuals during their intervention. The presence of a few people engaging in violence in and around a protest does not authorize police to brand the entire protest as non-peaceful, nor does it not give the State carte blanche to use force against protesters or carry out indiscriminate arrests. More importantly, the Special Rapporteur emphasizes that, even when some protesters engage in violence during an assembly, thus losing the protection of the right to peaceful assembly, they still retain all other rights, including the right to life and right to bodily integrity. 18 44. Therefore, violent elements should be extracted from the protest and dealt with in accordance with the rule of law. The persistent failure in dealing appropriately with these few violent individuals raises serious questions as to why an effective and well-trained police force seems unable to handle a few violent people during protests. It is clear that persistent violence by a few individuals is marring the image and effectiveness of public protests. Extracting these violent individuals requires skill, training and dedication on the part of the police. After meeting with authorities across the country, the Special Rapporteur is confident that Chile’s police forces have the ability to better handle this situation. 45. The Public Prosecutor stated that it was very difficult to investigate disruptive individuals and hold them accountable. There are reportedly hundreds of cases of such individuals brought to his attention. However, the ability of his office to handle these cases is often hampered owing to insufficient evidence provided by the police. He believes that police reluctance to gather evidence is linked to the fact that violent protesters typically face only minor charges, punishable by community service and verbal apologies. The Special Rapporteur stresses that it is of utmost importance that agents provocateurs are arrested, prosecuted and tried in accordance with the principles of due process. 46. The Special Rapporteur received testimonies from students, including minors, detained during demonstrations in 2011. Most of them were released a couple of hours later, but the detention prevented them from joining the assembly. INDH noted that the majority of the detainees were not subsequently prosecuted, which demonstrated that the police resorted to arbitrary arrests to illegally curb protests. 19 47. Finally, the Special Rapporteur is concerned that officers have, at times, shown hostility with regard to the work of INDH. For example, in 2013, INDH released a report that was critical of police action during the 2011 protests. In response, the head of police harshly criticized INDH and, in 2015, a parliamentary procedure was subsequently initiated aimed at demoting the Director of INDH. The move was unsuccessful, but INDH continues to be the subject of repeated public criticisms from the police and some members of Parliament, who question the body’s impartiality. 48. The Special Rapporteur reiterates his full support for INDH and its staff, who undertake important and independent work as human rights watchdogs, in compliance with its parliamentary mandate. 18 19 10 See A/HRC/31/66, paras. 8-9. See INDH, Situación de los Derechos Humanos en Chile, Informe anual 2011, p. 77. Available at www.indh.cl/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/27555-Informe-Anual-2011-BAJA1.pdf.